4 comments:

The no jail law
said...

I could not possibly comment on this case, as indeed neither can any person who did not attend the trial in its entirety, but I begin to suspect that all legal officials have one thing and one thing only drummed in to them:

No matter what happens, no matter what the crime, do NOT put any one in jail.

It seems that alcohol is almost as good as having a pussy-pass, doesn't it?

Recent personal experience:

Due to circumstances I've lived in a shared house for over a year. The upstairs neighbour drinks heavily and regularly disturbs all with loud music, shouting to himself and smashing furniture at two/three in a morning. He has verbally assaulted and threatened every other resident in the house, has been warned on multiple occasions by the landlord and has driven two residents to move out (police want nothing to do with any complaints).

A few weeks ago he, drunk as usual, grabbed some of my neighbour property, which he had unwisely left on the stairs, and started screaming abuse whilst throwing it down the stairs. Neighbour comes out of room and a shouted argument ensues. I stand at my door and watch as neighbour regains his property and with a few choice words retires to his room.

Yesterday I learnt (through the grapevine) that the neighbour had been arrested and was facing a court appearance for common assault (over six weeks later) and they had attempted to have his dog described as dangerous, the dog is a shivering coward and wasn't even present. Being an honest citisen (read naive idiot in retrospect) I went to the police station to make a statement about what I had witnessed.

Guess what? Yep, the officer refused to take a statement as it portrayed the drunken instigator in a bad light and was prejudicial to his case. The officer insinuated I was either lying or had been put up to it by my neighbour. He also stated an investigation had proved my neighbour had committed a serious crime and would be judged in court.

SO! The police here apparently, without bothering to speak to any witnesses (of which there were two others after myself) make a judgment and then not only don't bother collecting any evidence that might contradict this but actually refuse to record such evidence when it is presented to them FFS

And the drunks new favourite saying if anyone dares to suggest they wish to sleep? 'Fuck off or I'll call the police and get you done for assaulting me'.

It's just that whilst I always expected a solicitor to pick and choose evidence to portray their client in the best light, isn't it the job of the police to gather all the evidence, not just the bits which support the opinion they've jumped to before knowing anything?